They mean well. They really do. All those business pundits and writers who are yelling at us over and over and over again, “Adapt or die!” … as if we were headed toward the Interstate while riding a pennyfarthing bicycle. Or as if they were roadside fire-and-brimstone preachers with signs warning, “Repent, the end is nigh!”
They tell us they are trying to save us from being Xerox, which developed the personal computer but failed to commercialize it, or Kodak, which failed to keep up with the shift to digital photography. But like all aphorisms, the “adapt or die” rallying cry needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Otherwise, the relentless admonitions not to fear change can end up feeding into another sort of anxiety: a fear of getting left behind. And anxious decision making is rarely good decision making.
There’s certainly a risk involved in not adopting new technologies, but there’s also a risk in not implementing new technology well. It’s easy to fall into the trap of chasing the latest new disruptive innovation—ERP, RFID, big data, blockchain, generative AI—but not knowing what to do with it after we grab hold of it.
Consider this: In a poll of 305 executives by the consulting company PwC, 83% of respondents said that their supply chain technology investments have not fully delivered on expectations.
Interestingly, the report’s authors argue that the problem is not the technology itself. Rather, they write, companies often do a poor job of planning out the implementation and setting markers or key performance indicators (KPIs) for success. “Technology initiatives typically do not have a well-articulated value-delivery plan—and therefore struggle to meet expectations and end up with a ‘go live’ being the sole marker of success,” says Matt Comte, PwC’s operations transformation practice leader.
As a result, there are too many cases of companies failing to take full advantage of their technology implementations or employees still running their Excel spreadsheets on the side.
Another favorite aphorism of the pundit class is, “Fail fast!” To be sure, learning to take risks, make quick decisions, and embrace mistakes is all-important. But let’s make sure we at least take some time to learn why we failed before failing fast again. Otherwise, you risk failing fast over and over again, with the only significant result being that you’ve made your people cynical about your next new technology implementation or next big corporate initiative.
Sometimes in our haste to move quickly and respond to today’s challenges, we forget to take time to look back and assess how well the last project played out. It can be very uncomfortable to hold a “postmortem” and identify where we made mistakes and assess the wisdom of the decisions we made. But the lessons learned can be so valuable.
Research indicates that not enough of us take this last step. For example, a group of researchers from McKinsey & Co. and Kuehne Logistics University did a deep study of the sales and operations planning (S&OP) process. One of their findings was that few companies track the success of decisions they make at an S&OP meeting. In particular, they fail to measure those decisions’ business impact. Yet doing so would help them gather solid data they could use to create a short list of decision options for the next time around.
To be clear, I am not advocating for you to cling to your paper pick lists and your Excel spreadsheets or to ignore that next corporate efficiency initiative. Let’s just make sure our drive for innovation and adaptation is thoughtful and ongoing, and realize it doesn’t end the moment we flip the switch on a new technology.
